 I think you can hear and see from JV's presentation and also from Nelly's presentation that there is a vast amount of data in this report, probably more statistics, more new and original data than we've ever had before in any world migration report. In addition to what has been presented today, there are other statistics which I think are terribly relevant for the international policy debate about migration and development. I'll just mention one of those. In chapter four of the report, we're able to give you for the first time ever a figure which tells us what proportion of migrants in the north and the south actually send remittances, actually send money back home. Now the whole migration and development debate tends to focus on money and the huge sums of money that are sent between north and south, but often we don't pay enough attention to understanding who is actually sending this money, why are they sending this money and why is it that large numbers of migrants are not sending money back home? And there are interesting differences which come out of the report, so as JV pointed out at the beginning of his presentation, I would urge all of you to take a close look at the report because it does have a very rich set of statistics and data. At the same time, it sets us with a challenge because it's quite difficult to make generalisations and draw conclusions from such a rich source of information. But I'll try to sum up now by highlighting some of what we think are some of the key important messages from this report. I think a key one to carry forward to the high-level dialogue is that this report in a unique way has demonstrated that migration does improve well-being across a range of different dimensions. As Nelly has explained, for the first time we've been able to compare the lives of migrants with people who stayed behind in the country of origin who have a similar profile, what we've called match-stayers, and that is a unique exercise that has not been possible before in the migration field. So that's a new comparison, so we can say that migration improves well-being. At the same time, secondly, we've been able to compare the lives of migrants and non-migrants, and usually the comparison that is made because we have much better data in the OECD countries and much better data in the developed part of the world is that we usually look at the situation of migrants in the US, in Europe, in Australia, and we compare their situation with natives. This time, we've been able to present a global picture and we're able to show what is life really like for a migrant, whether he or she moves to the north or to the south, and I think there are very interesting findings that we've been able to demonstrate in this report showing that well-being does matter according to where you come from and where you go to. We know that these terms north and south are generalisations and there are different ways of defining north and south, but we wanted to use these terms to make, I think, a political point in this report because these terms are shorthand for developed and developing, and I think what we wanted to show was that there are important differences according to these various pathways. I think what Nellie's chapter 4 finding show in particular is that north-north migration is overwhelmingly positive. South-north migration, the results are mixed. We see certain positive results in terms of economic gains, certainly people gain in income, but in other terms they rate their lives less well than that of the native born. In terms of north-south flows, it's important to remember that among the north-south population that is moving to the south, we have a mixed group. We have young people who may be leaving places like Portugal looking for work in Brazil, in Angola and Mozambique, but we also have American retirees going to Panama and Mexico in increasing numbers. We often don't think about the implications for development of those types of movement. If you look at the age breakdown, and again I encourage you to look at the statistics in the report, you see differences in the age breakdown of migrants according to these pathways, and many of the people moving from north to south are much older than the people moving from south to north. Then finally, perhaps the bleakest picture in this report is, and perhaps the area of greatest policy concern is south-south migration, which has been neglected in the migration and development debate. It's only recently, for example, that the GFMD has begun to focus much more on south-south migration in its deliberations. I think this report encourages us to investigate much more and to focus much more on the lives of migrants in the south. Now, turning to the five key messages of the report, as a number of speakers have said, we wanted to, in the lead-up to the high-level dialogue, to try and bring the discussion back to the migrant, to human welfare and human wellbeing. Too often the debate in the migration and development field is about money. It's about remittances. It's about financial help. We often lose sight of the fact that migrants have to work very hard in new destinations. They have to set up to create a new life for themselves in order to send that money back home. What is the cost of doing that? Secondly, quite deliberately, we wanted to use the term well-being because that is the language of the development community. Too often, the development community does not engage fully in this migration and development debate. We wanted to start with the concept of well-being, which is mentioned in the Millennium Declaration as the major purpose of development. Development is about improving human wellbeing. Starting from that concept, we have prepared here the first ever report on the well-being of migrants. I think this is terribly important when we come to the post-2015 debate, which I'll come to in a moment. Thirdly, before the HLD, we wanted to look at the relationship between migration and development in a different way. I encourage you to not be over-concerned with old notions about development and migration, and migration being a result of a lack of development. Often, the development community feels reluctant to talk about migration because they think migration is something negative that results from a lack of opportunities. I think what this report shows is that only a minority of all migrants in the world move from south to north, from developing to developed countries. As Gervais pointed out, if you look at the rate of migration in the north, it's actually higher than in the south, often because it's easier for people to move in the north. There are fewer barriers to movement. There are more opportunities for them, and that brings gains. That is an important point to keep in mind. We hope that we've been able to inject some fresh thinking into the migration and development debate ahead of the high-level dialogue. Finally, we think that this Gallup world poll has a great deal of potential to help us understand how the well-being of migrants will change in the future. We think that is terribly important for the post-2015 debate about the future of the global development agenda. In recent years, we have been trying to ensure that migration is integrated into that post-2015 debate. There are different ways in which that could happen. I think one of the key messages that we're trying to get across is that if you want to talk about development and societal progress, you have to keep in mind that you have to ensure that vulnerable groups like migrants are not marginalized, discriminated, forgotten about. A key message I think from the report of the high-level panel, which has recently reported to the Secretary General on the future of the global development agenda, is that nobody should be left behind when we talk about the new global development agenda. I think what this report enables us to do is to say something about the well-being of migrants and to continue to report on their well-being, to ensure that they are not left behind and not forgotten about in this broader discussion about the future of the global development agenda. Next slide, please. Just to conclude, the report has this structure. In addition to all the statistics, I would urge you to read the portraits in the report. We tried to introduce a human dimension into this report and tell you about the lives of real people who've migrated either from south to south, south to north, north to north, north to south. There are some really interesting stories in the report. We've also tried to capture the fact that clearly this report cannot, because of the nature of the Gallup World Poll, it cannot provide a completely representative picture of the different categories of migrants that exist in the world today. It is a broad generalisation and so we've tried to highlight in those portraits problems to do with trafficking or stranded migrants in Ethiopia and other different categories of vulnerability and the stories of vulnerable migrants that are not easy to capture in the Gallup World Poll. Finally, if you want further information, including I think this presentation today, you will be able to obtain that information from our website, including some information, including factory, press release and other reference materials. Finally, I'd like to say a very big thank you, first of all, to the governments who have supported the production of this report Australia, Hungary and Switzerland. I would like to give a heartfelt thanks to the many colleagues in IOM who worked tirelessly over the last two years or so in preparing this report. This is really a team effort that involves contributions from our translators, our publications team, our donor relations team and our research team. I'd like to thank all of them for contributing to this report and we hope that you will find this report useful in your future work.